more from this thinker | more from this text
Full Idea
Creatures that are able to recognise natural kinds and laws have a selective advantage, so Darwinism suggests that we should have some native ability to detect natural kinds.
Gist of Idea
Darwinism suggests that we should have a native ability to detect natural kinds
Source
Alexander Bird (Philosophy of Science [1998], Ch.3)
Book Ref
Bird,Alexander: 'Philosophy of Science' [UCL Press 2000], p.117
A Reaction
This seems right, but it makes 'natural kind' a rather instrumental concept, relative to our interests. True natural kinds cut across our interests, as when we discover by anatomy that whales are not fish, or that rubies and sapphires are both corundum.
| 15170 | We distinguish species by their nominal essence, not by their real essence [Locke] |
| 16937 | You can't base kinds just on resemblance, because chains of resemblance are a muddle [Quine] |
| 13583 | There might be uninstantiated natural kinds, such as transuranic elements which have never occurred [Ellis] |
| 11860 | Lawlike propensities are enough to individuate natural kinds [Wiggins] |
| 15693 | One sample of gold is enough, but one tree doesn't give the height of trees [Gelman] |
| 6769 | In the Kripke-Putnam view only nuclear physicists can know natural kinds [Bird] |
| 6774 | Darwinism suggests that we should have a native ability to detect natural kinds [Bird] |
| 14956 | Explanation by kinds and by clusters of properties just express the stability of reality [Ladyman/Ross] |
| 13285 | Natural kinds support inductive inferences, from previous samples to the next one [Koslicki] |